Most people are of the mind we abandon the run in the second half because we have been behind. We actually run and score better in the second half this season.

C'mon, you should know better than that. His stats are skewed by the 48 yard run against Carolina. That was really the only game that separated PT and Ingram. Other than that they are nearly identical in the run game.

In fact, take away that one run and PT's averaging 4.11 yards per carry in the 2nd half this season.

Take away that game, and PT's averaging 3.3 yards per carry in 4 games.

We look bad running the ball because our running l plays are too predictable. If I can sit on my couch and tell my wife exactly what play is coming I promise you that the opposing D coordinator who has been watching film can do the same. I would say I could call 80% of our play just by looking at the formation. I am not just saying run or pass, I am saying exactly what the play is like dive, toss to sproles, screen, PA bomb over the top. Way too easy.

C'mon, you should know better than that. His stats are skewed by the 48 yard run against Carolina. That was really the only game that separated PT and Ingram. Other than that they are nearly identical in the run game.

In fact, take away that one run and PT's averaging 4.11 yards per carry in the 2nd half this season.

Take away that game, and PT's averaging 3.3 yards per carry in 4 games.

Its not the RB thats the problem with our run game, its the blocking.

If you are going to average a truncated (trimmed) mean then you must also remove the low... Not just the high.

Too many variables to lay blame on the 0-line by the stats of just one RB. Style, ability, and situational utilization play a part in that.

Team Ave for the season is 3.9 YPC (18th)
Texans are ave 3.7 YPC. (23rd)

Well ya'll are both proving that you can make stats look any way you want to support whatever opinion you might have. All I know is, I can see what RB is our best just by using my eyes. PT has no quit in him. That dude had his helmet popped off, getting hit in the head and he was still fighting for yards. I'll take that!

I may get heckled for this suggestion, but what if we were to, in say the first half or beginning of the 3rd quarter, run the ball....

...three downs in a row.

We've never done it. At least I've never seen it (this season). We pass three downs in a row a lot, with good reason. But we never just give one RB the ball and let him do his thing. What about three doses of Ingram/PT that aren't all A/B gap runs, and that present some variety to the run game?

To me its sort of like bluffing at the poker table...if you bluff and the lose, and then show your bluff, well then the next time people are in a hand with you they have to account for the fact that you may be bluffing again, even when you may really have the best hand.

With our running game, it's a little stagnant in that everyone figures there's no way the Saints will run the ball two downs in a row, much less three. Is it illogical? Well, yeah. But that's why they call it 'unpredictability,' because nobody would figure we would do something like that. Thoughts?

Well yeah, you gotta "commit" to the running game, and we came closer against SD than we usually do. No doubt you gotta use it enough to set up the play-action, but I'm still not convinced we're gonna fool anyone into deciding we're a running team.

Well yeah, you gotta "commit" to the running game, and we came closer against SD than we usually do. No doubt you gotta use it enough to set up the play-action, but I'm still not convinced we're gonna fool anyone into deciding we're a running team.

Now you are talking about convincing people?

The majority of the USA was not convinced we were any good 5 minutes after we won the Super Bowl.

Well yeah, you gotta "commit" to the running game, and we came closer against SD than we usually do. No doubt you gotta use it enough to set up the play-action, but I'm still not convinced we're gonna fool anyone into deciding we're a running team.

I guess I wasn't thinking along the lines of convincing a people that we are a 'running' team, because with Brees on our side there's no way anybody would ever think that.

I was thinking more along the lines of creating nagging doubts in the minds of defensive coaches and MLBs, in that, if they see us go 'run heavy' a couple times, then they have to think about it being a potential option every time we set up with a RB in the backfield.

Like those end-arounds Payton would call (and that actually surfaced once last night). Many times they were at the weirdest moments in the game, when I never would've thought that could be a potential play call, and to me, in hindsight that's what makes it so brilliant, because it forces DCs and MLBs to consider it when they are deciding on coverage packages